As of about 1 p.m. Tuesday, an overwhelming 70.2 percent of respondents to our online poll agreed that Mayor Tyrone Williamson should face censure for statements he made in the wake of the 2007 firing of Morgan Barrett, the city's former Public Works director.

We thought a recap of just what those statements were - at least on our end - might be in order, given all the fuss. So, to summarize:

On July 2, 2007, Williamson said, of Barrett, "In moving forward, it's better to part ways. In the past, he's been an asset to the city, and I know he'll do well for himself."

That same day, the city's human resources director, Christi Williams, said Barrett was not being accused of any criminal activity, and explained it was his "retaliation" to an investigation into alleged fuel thefts at the department that prompted his termination.

Williamson also said Barrett was fired in connection with the city's "at will" employment policy.

And that's it.

Any other information - suggestions signal improvement projects were not properly bid, that city-owned computers and software were used "to prepare and store" documents for a personal consulting business, that Barrett's computer contained "inappropriate sexually oriented adult material" - was garnered from outside sources, including police and auditors' reports, e-mails and court documents, all of which are protected by the state's Freedom of Information Act.

In our estimation, the statement Williams made about the firing being connected to "retaliation" was the only one that might reasonably be construed as inappropriate.

Of greater concern to us is the provenance of the resolution circulated among city leaders in recent weeks - in advance of a council meeting, we might add - that Barrett's attorney, Timm Murdoch, at the very least gave to Alderman Phil Carruth to present, and may have himself written.

The same attorney who said last week a decision had not been made regarding whether Barrett would sue the city, saying, "I'll let the city decide what they're going to do."

One can only wonder at what he meant by that.

Then there's also the fact that Carruth has previously demonstrated his investment in Barrett's situation by walking out of a council meeting after alderman deadlocked on a vote to reinstate Barrett following his firing.

Is censuring Williamson and Williams and issuing a formal apology to Barrett the right thing to do? The answer may depend on what comments, if any, were lodged by the pair to other media outlets, although The Courier has independently confirmed at least one cited in the resolution, Little Rock's KARK, is unable to attribute information it broadcasted to any one party.

In the meantime, the parties dredging up this issue - again - seem to have quite a few dogs in the fight.